On 21/11/2017 19:00, Javi Merino wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 08:57:06AM -0800, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > [snip] > >> As I said before, the minimal you guys (ARM and Linaro) can do is to at >> least upstream the Juno code! as a reference. Come on guys? what is >> preventing you to upstream Juno model? > > As Ionela pointed out earlier in the thread, the cpufreq driver for Juno > was not acceptable for mainline because it used platform specific code. > When it was converted to cpufreq-dt, the static power was left behind > because it can't be represented in device tree. This is because there > isn't a function that works for every SoC, different process nodes > (among other things) will need different functions. So it can't be just > a bunch of coefficients in DT, we need a function. Hence the callback.
The DT could contain the coef and a compatible string for a specific polynomial computation callback. I imagine we should not have a lot of different equations, no ? -- <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook | <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter | <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
